Not only that, but they still can be used for support. Tools could be used in conjunction with it for reporting errors, and use the info in the watermark to reported who you are, what device, etc. All things that are helpful but prone to human error. Plus, it would verify that you are a customer (have seen pirates try to use customer support) and the whole chain of acquisition (issue may be with the retailer purchased from).

Not only that, but they still can be used for support. Tools could be used in conjunction with it for reporting errors, and use the info in the watermark to reported who you are, what device, etc. All things that are helpful but prone to human error. Plus, it would verify that you are a customer (have seen pirates try to use customer support) and the whole chain of acquisition (issue may be with the retailer purchased from).

I agree. There can be useful reasons to have watermarks.

I have no issue with serial numbers been used in computer games and verification of your serial to sign up to support forums. Although, I don't know of any case where serials that have been leaked/stolen/generated and distributed on the net have ever resulted in action against the original owner of that serial.

I still think watermarking is better than encrypted DRM, especially when you consider the use of encryption does not preclude the inclusion of watermarking in addition.

Normally they just invalidate the serial, so the purchaser or anyone else can no longer use it. Legal action is rare, because you have to prove they did it. Doubt gets introduced if anyone else has access to their things or computer, making it an uphill battle. Just like if a car is used in a crime, you cannot just charge the owner with the crime. (Before you mention speed cameras and traffic light cameras, their legality is in dispute in many areas for this reason)

Normally they just invalidate the serial, so the purchaser or anyone else can no longer use it. Legal action is rare, because you have to prove they did it. Doubt gets introduced if anyone else has access to their things or computer, making it an uphill battle. Just like if a car is used in a crime, you cannot just charge the owner with the crime. (Before you mention speed cameras and traffic light cameras, their legality is in dispute in many areas for this reason)

Yep. Will the same occur when copies of watermarked books appear though? It's become increasingly common for people to receive letters with flimsy evidence saying pay X or we take you to court (for downloaders based on IP), the same could apply to the source of any book, will anyone want to risk the cost of going to court to show they didn't upload it?

Yep. Will the same occur when copies of watermarked books appear though? It's become increasingly common for people to receive letters with flimsy evidence saying pay X or we take you to court (for downloaders based on IP), the same could apply to the source of any book, will anyone want to risk the cost of going to court to show they didn't upload it?

That is one of the issues at hand with the IP based copyright infringement suits. A lot of requests for discovery to find out who is associated with the IP address for a given time are thrown out, and some cases even after discovery are thrown out, because the account holder isn't liable for the infringement. Typically the only ones that stick are the ones where the person admits doing it.

Encryption based DRM (EBDRM) limits the user experience too much. The lack of cross-platform-support, the need for third party software, extra bought SIM cards and so on is a real deal-breaker. EBDRM has led to the comic/tragic situation, where users opt to google a title and download it for free, because buying it is too much of a hassle.
And I mean potential buyers, not "hard core free downloaders". Switching to watermarking can (IMO) only increase the incomes from ebooks, and hopefully lower the prices a bit.